Just to change the subject a bit, I remember when Scientific American used to be a really good magazine. I read those those issues from the 60s and 70s I wonder how such quality was delivered for such a low price. In the 80s, the new issue was always my first stop at the uni library. Things are different now. It's not there yet, but I guess that soon SciAm will be in a neck and neck race with Popular Science and Popular Mechanics to see who can publish the most ridiculous "National Enquirer" of the science & engineering world. I stopped reading it long ago.
The Convair XFY was abandoned partiallty because it was hard to land. They never tried a vertical takeoff with the Lockheed XFV.
There was an Australian TV program on weird aircraft that covered stuff like this. My favourite was the inflatable airplane that the US army played with back in the fifties.
to me the biggest joke is this is being marketed as beng "green" ... how can any sort of plane, other than a hang glider (or other unpowered plane), be a "green" method of transportation for one person ? we all (well the vast majority) have our own green method of transportation, our legs; i might go so far as to include bicycles.
VTOL's are, and always have been, going nowhere. No pun intended. Helicopters and Harriers have their place, don't get me wrong, but until we figure out how to reverse polarity (localized, of course!) on gravity, the energy consumption is just too high. To call that thing green is laughable. You'd be better off with blimps and ballast bags.
